United States v. Rines

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding non-constitutional Booker error harmless where judge stated he would find the same sentence absent the guidelines but did not mention specific factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
• finding no ex post facto violation when a defendant's Guidelines range was 70-87 months and his sentence was 70 months
• commenting “[w]e decline Defendant’s invitation to hold that the Supreme Court ordered us to violate the Constitution”
• commenting “[w]e decline Defendant’s invitation to hold that the Supreme Court ordered us to violate the Constitution”
• “[Defendant] was sentenced within the guidelines range, so he cannot complain of any unanticipated harshness.”
• “It is true that the district court did not march through § 3553(a)’s sentencing factors, but we have never imposed such a requirement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).